Ignorance. Again.

Nattering Naybob: Hello, The Red Ranger. A particular theme that I come back to time and time again, both in our little blog and in pre-Second Grade Minds emails that we have exchanged (on our companys’ time I might add), is ignorance of the general public and the decreasing level of intellectual curiosity among our populus. Oh, we generally know which are the hottest iPhone and Android apps, and we can decipher the complex mechanism of the latest smartphone we have purchased, and how to transfer pictures from said phone, via our TV, thru our MiFi device, and divide half of the gallery and send one half to our desktop computer in the attic and the other half of the gallery to our spouse’s smartphone (“You mean you don’t know how to do that? It’s simple….”), but when it comes to basic knowledge about civics, government, current affairs, or anything not related to amusement, electronic gadgets, or entertainment, most people don’t care anymore.

This article by CNBC’s Dan Mangan that appears NBCnews.com, shows how the general public’s ignorance of how the new features of Obamacare (the President himself calls it that), is costing us money and restricting us from taking advantage of some of the hard-earned victories of the Health Care battle.

Here is a key passage from the article

Making the job of selling the brand-new exchanges even more difficult is the public’s general ignorance about health insurance. A recent Journal of Health Economics study found that just 14 percent of people were able to correctly define all of four insurance terms that could affect plan-buying decisions: deductibles, copays, coinsurance and maximum out of pocket costs.

But the persistent ignorance about the Obamacare exchanges is striking given extensive news coverage of the health-reform law upheld by the Supreme Court last year as well as a presidential election, which was seen as a referendum on President Barack Obama’s championing of the legislation.

Now I know what you are going to say, Red Ranger: that the Health Care plan is too complicated and too confusing. That may have some credence, and I am sure that the President and his staff did not do the best job they could have in explaining its features. But still, is it not another example of how in this age of supposed unprecedented access to learning (especially via the internet), the general knowledge level, and maybe more importantly, the desire of citizens to learn about topics that affect them, is a sad commentary on the state of our society. Now wouldn’t you agree with that, The Red Ranger.

The Red Ranger: I do agree with you that the general public does not take the time to educate themselves in regard to many of the issues that impact them the most.  How else could you explain an inexperienced, buffoon like Obama being elected President.

However, I too am not all that well informed about how the exchanges work.  One of the key reasons being that I have insurance thru my employer and I was ensured by Obama during the debate regarding Obamacare that I would be able to keep this insurance so there really is no reason for me to spend time learning about the exchanges at this point since I should not need to avail myself to their services.

For something as large as Obamacare the government should have undertaken a media information campaign similar to all the infomercials that are on TV.  They should have created short 30 minute max, informational videos and then bought time on the airwaves and posted on YouTube, Netflix, Hulu, Facebook, Twitter and any other social media site that people are flocking to these days.  For an administration that is supposedly so media savvy they really haven’t done a good job here.

Nattering Naybob: With the exception of a couple of absurd sentences, I find some merit in your retort, especially the last paragraph. That is essentially the crux of my point, that all the social media and internet-based means of communication should be put to better use than simply showing videos of people walking out of restrooms with toilet paper stuck to their shoe. And you are right, some of the ingenuity and innovation that went into his two election victories, should have been employed in the public review portion of Project Obamacare.

How can this be happening?

The Red Ranger: Just another sign that the Obama economy is a disaster.

How can household income be going down since the recession was over?  Shouldn’t income go up in a recovery?  If not what is the definition of a recovery?

I do not solely blame Obama for this but he is a big contributing factor.  Look what Obamacare is doing to jobs in this country.  75% of new jobs are part-time.  Companies are cutting back people’s hours so that they do not fall under Obamacare.  Now companies are starting to cut out spousal medical benefits if they can get them elsewhere.  I honestly believe that the vast upheaval in the medical insurance arena is exactly what Obama and the Dems want.  They want it all to fall apart so badly that a government run and controlled healthcare system looks better and better to the masses.

We are on the long inexorable match toward a fully socialist society.

Nattering Naybob: There are many factors at play here, and I am gratified that you are not blaming Obama solely. One factor that you fail to mention is income inequality. Corporate profits and the salaries and pay packages for corporate CEOs are at an all-time high. And this article from the New York Times (a little lengthy but well worth the time investment) lays out a frightening situation of how poorly these United States stacks up in a host of human metrics. And I do not think any one person as President can make a difference until we find a way to bridge the partisan divide. I think that is the single key issue in all of this that has to be overcome.

Regarding your claim that “Obama and the Dems” want the medical insurance industry to fall apart… I think that is not an accurate characterization. Conversely I believe that a Socialist form of healthcare for people whose circumstances prevent them from otherwise getting access–without disrupting the extant health care coverage and apparatus for people with them means to purchase more comprehensive coverage–is not a bad thing. I think Obama’s biggest mistake in the run-up to his healthcare legislation was not including a simple “Medicare for all” provision, which some have referred to as the “public option”. But Obama thought that excluding this option would signal a willingness to compromise with the Republicans, which would then reap benefits later. But Obama failed to realize that Republicans in Congress now, are generally not sane people.

The Red Ranger: I believe that this income inequality has accelerated under Obama and he has done nothing to reverse the trend.  While CEO’s are an easy target given their sometimes outlandish pay packages I do not think that this is really the root cause of the issue just due to the mere fact that there are so few of them.

In regard to healthcare, I too believe that there should be a fallback for those who cannot help themselves.  But again, like in so many other discussions I have a hard time when those you won’t help themselves or make bad decisions piggyback with those who cannot help themselves.

Natterng Naybob: Unfortunately I think that it has to be considered “the cost of doing business” if any type of assistance or relief program, counts among its rolls those who are truly undeserving whether it be the result of fraud or recklessness. I am all for the vigilant weeding out of these miscreants. But I am opposed to punishing those who are truly needy and have had some honest misfortune in their lives from getting help, because of the (what I regard to be) statistically low instances of the fraud or undeservedness of others.